Scout Attributes Test

I decided to conduct a BASIC test to see how the Scouts attributes affected his performance. I am still using FM 10 and here is the experiment I conducted. I started a save as a Blue Square South club with a small database and recruited seven scouts all with a JPA of 10 and JPP of 10. They all had similar reputations but with varying attributes the idea being that the success of their scouting should bereflected in their attributes.

I gave each scout the same assignment which was to scout England for 3 months and they all had the same level of knowledge. After the scouting had finished I found that five of the scouts had all found about 150 players whereas two of the scouts only found 49 players each. When I investigated the various attributes of the scouts I could find no correlation between the number of players found and any of their attributes. One of the scouts that only found 49 players actually had a determination of 19. Even scouts with low motivation and determination managed to find 150 players.

I then set up a further assignment to scout France and again all of the scouts had a similar knowledge of France. The results were the same as the scouting of England in that the same five scouts found the highest number of players and same 2 scouts had fewer.

I was expecting the scouts with the better stats in adaptability to perform better but again I could find no correlation in the outcomes.

I know this is only a very basic test over a short period and you could argue that over a longer period of time maybe a scout with more determination would still be finding players where other scouts would be finding less..

Can anyone give any feedback on something I may have missed in the test or does this suggest that the attributes apart from maybe JPA and JPP have little impact on the scout results.

I did have a selective check on whether the 150 players were the same for all 5 scouts and in many cases they were. Interestingly though 2 of the scouts did manage to find about 6 or so 17 and 18 year olds that the others didn’t find but again there was not correlation with their attributes ie They were not the highest in working with youngsters etc

Not much point in scouts anyway tbh, i only ever use them to scout players i find to make sure of their potential. No scout in the game can do as good a job of finding talented kids than i can myself so why bother with schedules, hell, i only ever have one scout at a time because any more than one is a waste of wages.

Personally I haven't noticed any real difference between a scout with good mental stats and the one with bad. I'd say adaptability only means how well the person adapts to your club/country, not how well he adapts to different countries while on duty.

Great idea. I'd suggest that discipline and professionalism might possibly maybe affect the number of reports brought back. You might also try scouts with 5/5 and 15/15 for JA and JP to see what happens as well as re-running the same test a couple of times from the exact same starting conditions.

Great idea. I'd suggest that discipline and professionalism might possibly maybe affect the number of reports brought back. You might also try scouts with 5/5 and 15/15 for JA and JP to see what happens as well as re-running the same test a couple of times from the exact same starting conditions.

I did also try with a couple of scouts that had low JA and JP, couldn't do higher than 10 as couldn't find any out of work, and there was no difference. Also there was no difference between those on high or low discipline.

I imagine there are lots of hidden attributes that could explain the results but this would mean using Genie Scout and I would rather not. Any way if it's the hidden stats that are responsible then you wouldn't know these when recruiting anyway so you wouldn't find out they were rubbish until you had employed them

Have just peaked at Genie Scout and the poor scouts from my experiment have a scout rating of c18% and the better ones have c40%. However I don't know how GS makes up this % as when you look at all their hiddensstats there doesn't seem to be any relationship. In fact 1 of the poor scouts has professionalism of 18

Always thought that scouts with higher adaptability would finish their assignments faster(of countries they have no natural knowledge of), it's disappointing it's not the case.

Interesting test, don't think i've seen anyone actually do this sort of test on scouts attributes and i think SI never gave any clues on this.

It is probably down to their CA.

But really a test like this is impossible without using FMRTE and manually specifying all of their attributes, hidden and otherwise.

Yes it is down to ca but it is knowing what makes up the ca from their attributes so that you can recruit a good scout from the stats available to you rather than use Genie to tell you. I still think it is valid without any FMRTE tinkering as there is a spread of attributes across the scouts being tested.

May continue this test over time as there are endless possibilities like will a scout improve if you actually sign up players he recommends etc

I only use scouts to check out specific players I have identified myself. Never send them on assignments. I operate with one/two local & one overseas chap. Will use what I have when I take over. Improve stats (replace) when his contract expires.

Never been convinced that the player reports from a scout with 20/20 (PA/PP) are better than from a scout with 6/6. They all cover the same stuff.

Yes it is down to ca but it is knowing what makes up the ca from their attributes so that you can recruit a good scout from the stats available to you rather than use Genie to tell you. I still think it is valid without any FMRTE tinkering as there is a spread of attributes across the scouts being tested.

May continue this test over time as there are endless possibilities like will a scout improve if you actually sign up players he recommends etc

Their CA will be spent on all sorts of crucial things you can't see, though, so it's fruitless judging solely by their visible attributes. I mean that's the point; SI try to make it transparent enough that you can intuit things in a naturalistic way, without exposing all the workings of why exactly something happens. If you want to know why exactly something happens, you're going to need to expose all the workings.

Their CA will be spent on all sorts of crucial things you can't see, though, so it's fruitless judging solely by their visible attributes. I mean that's the point; SI try to make it transparent enough that you can intuit things in a naturalistic way, without exposing all the workings of why exactly something happens. If you want to know why exactly something happens, you're going to need to expose all the workings.

So basically the only guide at the recruitment stage is JPA/JPP and then after that it's a case of pot luck and if he's rubbish get rid as soon as possible and try again. I don't actually think it is transparent enough that you can intuit things in a naturalistic way as I haven't as yet seen any indicators that would help you make the right choice apart from JPA/JPP. IRL you would have lots of info that would help you. After all I am not saying that you should know everything under the bonnet but even if you did know a few things it wouldn't necessarily mean you could attract the right scout anyway and then you would have a trade off situation. You may say for example that you know a scout is good at X and Y but you can't afford him and need to recruit a scout with X or Y. The trouble is we have no way of really knowing whether he is any good at X or Y.

Can anyone tell me if they know how a scout report received from a top scout is better than one from a duffer? I mean, the info provided & opinions are the same right?

Can anyone tell me if they know how a scout report received from a top scout is better than one from a duffer? I mean, the info provided & opinions are the same right?

I think you will find the better the scout then the more accurate the star rating. You often find that there will be disagreement between 2 scouts and when you look at their JPA/JPP you realise why

Can anyone tell me if they know how a scout report received from a top scout is better than one from a duffer? I mean, the info provided & opinions are the same right?

If a "bad" scout tells you a player is rubbish, he is. But if he tells you this player is good, that might not be true.

If a "bad" scout tells you a player is rubbish, he is. But if he tells you this player is good, that might not be true.

Is that a fact? Are you saying it is not possible for a bad scout to say a player is rubbish although really he may be ok?

Well it's not a fact but during my games, I've often seen the star rating decrease between the report of a "bad" scout and the report of a good one, but I never ever saw the opposite. To sum up, I think a bad scout will overestimate the player, and never underestimate him.

Question: Does max scouting knowledge of a specific country mean every player from that country will show up on "Player Search"?

So basically the only guide at the recruitment stage is JPA/JPP and then after that it's a case of pot luck and if he's rubbish get rid as soon as possible and try again. I don't actually think it is transparent enough that you can intuit things in a naturalistic way as I haven't as yet seen any indicators that would help you make the right choice apart from JPA/JPP. IRL you would have lots of info that would help you. After all I am not saying that you should know everything under the bonnet but even if you did know a few things it wouldn't necessarily mean you could attract the right scout anyway and then you would have a trade off situation. You may say for example that you know a scout is good at X and Y but you can't afford him and need to recruit a scout with X or Y. The trouble is we have no way of really knowing whether he is any good at X or Y.

This is absolutely one of the biggest flaws of FM. It has always been, and will probably always be. FM is a fun game, but it can never be a good strategy game as long as it's filled to the brim with fake difficulty. I absolutely despise the fact that we are supposed to make intelligent decisisions without being given hardly any of the vital information. Why are we given a bunch of information on the scouts ability, if it doesn't actually reflect said scout's ability? That's just silly.

its about time the game developers told the game players (us) what each stat relates to each person and what it does and effects are. this is utter trash having stats that are just based on myths of what they have an effect on or not in the game. why put them in the game if they dont tell us what they are for?

p.s. by this i mean secondary stats, for scouts for examples

Is that a fact? Are you saying it is not possible for a bad scout to say a player is rubbish although really he may be ok?

i dont, i have done a similar experiment using potental of players in geniescout then sending the scouts to look at them

i have seen players with 79-81% potential in his position rated at 3 stars when it should be five.

you have to remember you have to scout multiple times for more accurate readings

reason was they are located in africa or USA

I scouted the player several times and he was at a lower league club but in the same country.

EDIT: Sorry, I don't have a screenshot from before he joined the club